Defect 6612732

Tom Rodriguez Thomas.Rodriguez at Sun.COM
Thu Nov 29 11:44:56 PST 2007

I thought that bug was closed.  The test is actually invalid since it 
isn't using the strict modifier so extra precision in the expression is 
allowed.  See 6579973.  Anyway, I've closed that bug so don't bother 
looking at it.  I tagged a couple bugs in compiler1 as openjdk-starter 
but I don't see very many in compiler2 that would be easy to pickup and 
fix quickly.


rgougol at wrote:
> Thanks for all the feadbacks in advance. So I switched to this defect, 
> . The problem is 
> basically that C1 computes Double.MAX_VALUE * Double.MAX_VALUE == 
> Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY incorrectably false which should be true. The defect 
> is reproduced by invoking java -Xcomp -XX:UseSSE=1 . However this defect is not 
> reproduced in mixed mode even if the problematic method contains a large loop 
> and does get compiled?! Does it mean this defeat is extra complicated too? I 
> thought I should catch the defect starting from the function 
> LIRGenerator::do_ArithmeticOp_FPU(ArithmeticOp*) . However this function is 
> catched by GDB after the compilation of the problematic method?! Would it be 
> the right method to start tracing from?
> Sincerely,
> Nima Rouhollah Gougol

More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list